As requested: A Vision of America
December 26th, 2008

Recently president-elect Obama’s transition team sent email to the party faithful asking that they go to their www.change.gov website and postulate on their “Vision” of what American can be. Now, I don’t know if this is just good political theater, or if each and every response will actually be given due consideration. Probably somewhere in between. Nevertheless, I am always up for a challenge so I thought I’d give this a try.

Definition of a “Vision”

So what is a “Vision” anyway? Among the definitions of “Vision” put forth by Princeton University’s web dictionary are:

• A vivid mental image; “he had a vision of his own death“;
• sight: the ability to see; the visual faculty, “His vision is 20/20”;
• the perceptual experience of seeing; “the runners emerged from the trees into his clear vision“; “he had a visual sensation of intense light“;
• imagination: the formation of a mental image of something that is not perceived as real and is not present to the senses; “popular imagination created a world of demons“; “imagination reveals what the world could be“;
• a religious or mystical experience of a supernatural appearance; “he had a vision of the Virgin Mary“.

So a vision can range from fantasy to science to observation and back. Give a writer that much ground and you could end up with almost anything. However, I will try to keep my “visions” in the context of the political – categorized using the Obama team “Agenda”.

• Revitalizing the Economy
• Ending the War in Iraq
• Providing Health Care for All
• Protecting America
• Renewing American Global Leadership

The Economy

It seems as though every major economic FUBAR in the last 200 years was perpetuated by government. Not by government regulation – but government deregulation and meddling in business operations. Recessionary influence comes from debt/deflation reactions. When government influences poor business decisions (push sub-prime ARM mortgages – then follow with higher prime rates) and encourage over speculation (remove regulations on credit default swaps, etc.) they establish the environment of crisis.

It does not stop with Wall Street or financial institutions. Such poor political decisions as allowing corn ethanol subsidies and disallowing zero emission electric vehicle subsidies (Calif – 2000)– shows that government is still engaged in the practice of trying to generate wealth rather than competition. A very bad idea in a free market economy. Government is the biggest factor in ‘un-leveling’ the free economy playing field and it must stop soon. A global free market economy will not stand for long if governments get in the way of the process. Just as with a professional baseball game, the umpires and referees are there to see that the game is played by the rules – but they should not influence the outcome of the contest. Government is here to establish and enforce the rules – from there on out the players of the game need to stand or fall on their own merit. Bailouts only perpetuate the bad play of the contestants.

Economic recovery is embodied in many of the initiatives about which the president elect has opined. Energy solutions, infrastructure repair and improvement, ecology requirements and re-creating jobs are paramount. But when the government becomes the key de facto job producer and employer, there comes a threat to – once again – create an imbalance in the free market opportunities of business.

And lastly, let’s stop the political B.S. about energy. We are not stupid. Corn ethanol is a BAD idea; there is no such thing as Clean Coal; Hydrogen is not a panacea for energy solutions; and even if we had an abundance of energy creation – our national delivery grid is ancient and technically obsolete.  Petroleum will run out in 30 years (or at least it will be too expensive to ‘burn’ as fuel).  Scientists say CO2 will be at dangerous levels within 80 years. Do the math. Spend our national resources where it makes sense.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a free market vision for America: Repeal the Commodity Futures Modernization Act; phase out Freddie & Fannie completely; flatten out the tax code; allow free enterprise to determine the best next energy solution; get “shovel ready” infrastructure projects underway immediately; stop funding ‘operations’ like corn ethanol production and start funding ‘research and development’ – like better battery technology, lower cost nuclear energy solutions and natural gas storage methods; to name only a few.

War in Iraq – and Elsewhere

While the war in Iraq is thankfully winding down – as it should not have been started in the first place – Afghanistan looms as our next great FUBAR. More troops may not be the answer. More economic and educational aid may prove – pound for pound – more influential than ammunition.

Pushing Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters into Iran and Pakistan has its own set of potentials that may be worse than the disease. It appears that Islamic fundamentalists throughout the region out number democratic moderates. At least they are more prone to action, so it seems that they number more. If only we could mobilize the moderates….

Back in Iraq, our draw-down there is seen as inevitable. But the pressures on the fledgling democracy of Iraqi President Jalal Talabani and Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki are such that – without the powerful military of the U.S. to quell unrest – a power struggle will ensue and Obama may be forced to redeploy combat troops if he is not careful. I’m not sure that a coup or civil war in Iraq can be ignored by the U.S. due to the destabilizing influence of Iran in the region.

This bed was made by Bush – but Obama will have to sleep in it.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a ‘world peace’ vision for America: Engage in dialog and technology exchange with fundamentalist political groups. Education and knowledge will trump cultural dogma every time – given enough time. Infrastructure, schools and free trade improvements will bolster democratic governance. Use force only where life and liberty are in eminent danger. This goes hand in hand with the Global Leadership role the U.S. needs to reassert. When in Vietnam we Marines often complained about the “do not fire until fired upon” rule of engagement. However, in our own way we were somewhat proud that we where held to a different standard than our foe. It is not a weakness to hold humanity in high regard, even while others do not. Especially when others do not.

National Health Care Reform

I have been on the front “side line” of this for some time. I wanted to be on the front line, but my proposals never gained much momentum. My proposal was to establish a non-profit organization that was funded by government grants as a start-up, and then self funding over time. Investors are not all that excited about non-profit funding and the government seemed disinterested since I did not have any academic sponsorship.

First a little background. My wife is a nurse; her father a retired surgeon; her mother an RN. I have heard all the stories. On the other hand, I am an information technology (IT) professional by trade  (www.jwbennett.info). I’m one of those misguided individuals that think IT can help address any problem.

After hearing all the family war stories of how medical practitioners are forced in ever increasing numbers to abandon insurance networks and controls in favor of cash-services – and looking at the staggering number of people without health insurance, the long lines at emergency rooms, and so on – I had a thought. Let’s do a typical IT “Business Analyst” review of the average heath provider. Where do they spend their money; where do they spend their time; where do they make their money, and lastly, how do we measure success of the product or service offering?

My analysis led me to several conclusions. First, by far the most time and money is spent on record keeping. Patient records, insurance records and regulatory record keeping took 60% of the effort of a heath provider. None of which are particularly beneficial to the financial success of the enterprise. In typical IT Analyst fashion, I deduced that automating – or removing – much of this record keeping burden was essential to lowering cost and improving productivity of health providers.

The problem, of course is HIPPA. Not the Act, per se, but the processing and management of patient records by a 3^rd party is problematic. Answer – do HIPPA one better. Put the patient in charge of the record keeping (with considerable help from a secure internet based application that does the heavy lifting).

Next problem – who owns, controls and administers the internet application and database? An insurance company? The government? Hummm.. Any for-profit enterprise or government entity could have conflicts of interest that would strain the intent of HIPPA. So, the only answer I saw was a Non-Profit corporation that had considerable oversight by the government, the healthcare industry and the insurance companies. The internet program application must have considerable benefit for all – including, and foremost, for the patient. Tall order.

Beyond just electronic record keeping, this “Medical Registry Organization” (MRO) would provide ANSI-type standards for record interchange and security. The patient or his/her designate would determine which records were public, which were private, which were available in emergency, which providers has access to what, and so on.

Actions: Suggested actions to provide a ‘universal healthcare’ vision for America: The answer lies in offloading the recordkeeping burden to the record owner. Until the records burden is addressed costs will not moderate – for the taxpayer or the government. Just as banks used ATM’s to offload teller workloads to the account owners (decreasing cost and increasing productivity & profit dramatically, I might add); health care record management can be also offloaded to the patient. Every insurance or for-profit industry “electronic records” initiative will fail in the end due to competitive and regulatory pressures. An independent non-profit organization or “institute” is the only reasonable answer. Health care reform should also look at the many agencies and departments of government that are charged with health and welfare oversight (some 20 agencies in HHS plus EPA, OSHA, USDA,…) and try to rationalize and/or consolidate data, technology, personnel and facilities into a more robust and functional public health organization.

Protecting America

Homeland security has most of its resources focused on the prevention of terrorism. But the fact is most of the death and destruction the average citizen will face comes not from terrorists, but from nature and human error. Considering the money spent to date on homeland security, we have little to show for it. Katrina showed us what real homeland security should be – but was not. Beyond prevention, security means good threat assessment and effective first response.

As most intelligent travelers will tell you, the security show TSA puts on at the nation’s airports is nothing short of pageantry. It is there to instill a sense of security in the public – nothing else. Actually, the single reason 9/11 could not be repeated today is that airlines are now required to secure the cockpit door. It has little, if anything, to do with the TSA’s elaborate security threat detection methods. I could make a belt out of C4 explosive and walk on any plane in all but 4 or 5 airports in the U.S.. No problem. Any nonmetallic weapon can be taken on board almost any aircraft by almost anyone. And if you think this is news to any would-be terrorist, forget it. They already know. But since they cannot use the aircraft as a weapon any longer (and since the average American passenger is more attentive now days), they will move to softer targets.

By far the most effective anti-terrorism activities have been those we hear only rumors about. Communications monitoring & analysis, elaborate pattern matching, decryption methods and other technologies used by the NSA have done more to spoil would-be threats than all the long TSA lines put together. Add to that the efforts to remove the terrorist network money supply, and I think we could have decommissioned every metal detector in the US and been just fine. Ok, maybe that is a little irrational, but not by much.

Actions: Suggested actions for a “secure” vision for America: The DHS is a great idea, but its focus is upside-down. The TSA is at the top of the heap with regard to funding and influence, when it should be FEMA. Keep up the good work at NSA and CIA. Keep the DOD out of DHS programs. I’ve heard rumors of bills floating around congress to deploy federal troops to “assist” local law enforcement in the event of ”emergency”. Hummm. If the National Guard or state and local police are not properly trained or equipped, then fix it. Leave federal troops out of homeland security contingencies.

Renewing American Global Leadership

Without a doubt we have already made progress in this area. Just by electing president-elect Obama, Americans have reached across the cultural and economic gulf of world opinion. But we cannot rest on that laurel.

When we think of global leadership we think of the Middle East, Russia, Africa, Asia… but we also need to consider Mexico, Latin America and Canada. Of all our international dealings, our dealings with American states and border states should be improved first.

Under the Bush doctrine we have seen a major shift to the left in Latin America and an increase in organized drug crime in Mexico. While I too fear a nuclear Iran, I fear more a destabilized government in Mexico. If push came to shove, the Israelis are more than capable of handling a threat from Iran. Mexico however has many infrastructure, education and economic issues – exacerbated by U.S. immigration policy – that have a greater potential to affect the U.S.. You want to restore the U.S. leadership? Start by addressing the Mexican immigration issue.

Outside the Americas, a global economy – enriched by a global information technology network – is moving at breakneck pace. The welfare of everyone is starting to be influenced by everyone else. This will require – in time – a new look at not only national policy – but global policy and global governance. The U.N. is a political football and pretty much as effective as any organization run my committee. But, it is all we really have right now, so let’s see what we can do over the next four years to give it some balls (excuse the vernacular). Darfur, Guinea, Burma, Zimbabwe, et al – little action to deter genocide and massive rights violations. I think there is a place for an “international police force” but they must have the mandate, the training and the equipment to do the job.

Actions: Suggested actions to restore a “global leadership” vision for America: Start with immigration reforms and boarder state relations. Want to stop the march of leftist ideology in Latin America? Lift the Cuban embargo. Engage in open and frequent dialog with other states. Encourage political dissent and policy arguments. Often, if you get the other party talking enough, they reveal the REAL reason for their conduct. And it is usually power related. Give them ‘perceived power’ and they will be your friend for life. And sanctions rarely work either. Not in Cuba, not in Iran, not in Palestine. They only tend to push our adversaries closer together. Let’s try something different. How about open trade, domestic technology transfer, cultural influence, free and open dialog,… What a novel idea!

Lastly, I believe the U.N. is a fine place to voice opinion and do some political wrestling, but no where near a venue for pursuing global peace or justice. At least give it the mandate to do good independent international intelligence gathering so the true cause and affects of actions can be understood by all.  In my fantasy vision of a new world order I have a list of “what ifs”: What if Interpol became an agency of the U.N.? What if the G10 shared threat assessments with them? What if we established a full volunteer U.N. Police & Peacekeeping force?  What if we sponsored a movement to establish an international language?  A language not spoken by any permanent member of the Security Counsel; like Spanish?  What if, indeed. Too far out maybe?  Mark my words, the day may come when the U.N, yes the U.N., is our last best hope.  Woodrow Wilson’s League of Nations vision was far ahead of its time.  But – with the advent of the internet, international free trade and economic symbiosis among nations – it’s time may have come.  Indeed,  the time to make it work may be moving right past us….

For what it’s worth.

JB

Sources:

Bennett, J. (2008a). BLOG: Replacing rhetoric with truth, Aberant News, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://aberantnews.org/?p=51

Bennett, J. (2008b). BLOG: One Doctor’s Painful Decision, Aberant News, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://aberantnews.org/?p=49

Bernanke, B. (1983). “Non-Monetary Effects of the Financial Crisis in the Propagation of the Great Depression”. THE AMERICAN ECONOMIC REVIEW (The American Economic Association) 73 (3): 257-276.

CDS. (2008). Definition: Credit Default Swap. Wikipidia, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Credit_default_swap

Corn, D. (2008) Article: Foreclosure Phil, Mother Jones Magazine, August 2008, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2008/07/foreclosure-phil.html

Flat Tax. (2008). Countries that have flat tax systems; Wikipedia, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax

Kroft, S. (2008). The bet that blew up wall street, CBS – 60 Minutes, retrieved October 27th, 2008 from:http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/26/60minutes/main4546199.shtml

Miron, J. (2008). Commentary: Bankruptcy, not bailout, is the right answer; CNN, retrieved September 29, 2008 from: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/09/29/miron.bailout/

Mishkin, F. (1978). “The Household Balance and the Great Depression”. Journal of Economic History 38: 918-37.

Mufson, S. (2007). Article: Oil price rise causes global shift in wealth; The Washington Post, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/09/AR2007110902573_pf.html

NOW. (2006). Transcript: Who killed the electric car?; Public Broadcasting Service (PBS); retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.pbs.org/now/transcript/223.html

Paul. R. (2008). Article: monetary system is fraudulent; retrieved October 24th, CNN, 2008 from: http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/24/ron.paul.economy/

Pickins, T. (2008). America is addicted to foreign oil; T. Boone Pickins; retrieved October 25th, 2008 from: http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

U.N. (2008). The United Nations, MSN Encarta Encyclopedia Online, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from: http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761564986/United_Nations.html

Vance, L. (2008); The Flat Tax Is Not Flat, NewAmerican, retrieved October 25th, 2008 from http://thenewamerican.com/economy/commentary-mainmenu-43/442

WordNet (2008). Definition: Vision, Princeton University WordNet, Retrieved December 26, 2008, from: http://wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn?s=vision

Marriage & Sexuality in the U.S.
December 19th, 2008

I hold a somewhat controversial view of this whole same-sex marriage debate.  Recently, President-Elect Obama’s choice of right-wing evangelist Rick Warren as his inauguration invocation presenter has sparked further rhetoric on the “Marriage” debate. So, I thought it was time to lay my views out there – for what they are worth. First – “the Facts”.

1. Let’s look at what “marriage” is.  It is a religious rite.  Performed by a clergyman or other empowered individual (such as a justice of the peace), marriage is a purely religious tradition.  Marriage has not always been a vow of monogamy.  To the contrary, the bible and other religious scriptures (Torah, Koran,…) state that men could have multiple wives and sexual partners.  Abraham was said to have several hundred wives and concubines in his lifetime; the Prophet Muhammad is said to have had at least nine, and so on. 
2. Let’s look now at the U.S. Constitution and the doctrine of separation of church & state.  Churches are not taxed – in return for their exclusion from politics. Common Law is derived from social laws not religious “laws”.  With obvious Christian influence (…One nation under God; …endowed by his creator…; etc.) the U.S. Constitution and Bill of Rights acknowledges the moral compass of Christianity as a basis of traditional Common Law – but insists that tradition be a guide rather than an absolute.  There is no “State Church” so all religious beliefs and traditions are said to be equal in the eyes of the law.
3. The Bill of Rights states that, as U.S. citizens, we ALL have a right to “…life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” .  It is the purpose of government to empower these rights by allowing free expression and free enterprise.

So, if we use just these 3 facts as a basis for marriage law and rights in this country, we have to draw some very interesting conclusions. 

 

I recently asked several newly married couples (1^st time marriages, all) if they understood the legal covenants of marriage (e.g. equal responsibility for debts, community property, child care obligations, survivorship, entitlements, power of attorney, etc.).  None of them understood, fully, the legal ramifications of being “married”.  When I asked same sex couples about ‘social contracts’ however, I was amazed to find that they had very detailed knowledge of the terms and conditions of such a contract – right down to trust funds for survivorships and the lack of federal entitlements, such as spousal social security payments. So I found a notable disconnect between the tenets of a ‘social contract’ and those of a ‘marriage’. 

 

Next, we look at the US Constitution and the Bill of Rights.  This issue alone has considerable weight on this argument.  The individual’s right to liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a direct and specific indication that same-sex marriage cannot be made illegal on its face.  Denial of happiness to any couple or group because you do not agree with that group’s culture is not what liberty is all about.  It is a direct contradiction of the Bill of Rights and I cannot see how the U.S. Supreme Court could, under any reasonable interpretation of the Bill of Rights, find that same-sex marriage could be held illegal in ANY state in the union.

 

Ironically, it might be argued that ALL marriages are illegal – because no written covenant [contract] is in evidence.  And the parties to a purely religious marriage should not be given spousal rights without some type of written agreement on the specific issues of such rights – and the entitlements and responsibilities afforded by local, state and federal agencies.

 

So my conclusion is this:  We heterosexuals have no right to deny homosexuals their liberties or their happiness. It says so in the Bill of Rights.  Furthermore, the religious rite of marriage has no standing, legally, to dictate the legal covenants for spousal rites and responsibilities – unless those rights and responsibilities are acknowledged and agreed to in a social contract.  In other words, our Constitution, taken at face value, does not provide for ‘marriage’ as practiced in common law because neither party agrees to its many covenants in writing. 

 

So the next time the self righteous among you want to tilt against the same-sex windmill, take a minute to consider what would happen if your marriage were considered illegal and the many rights and resources available to you as a couple were suddenly removed.  Looks different that way; does it not?

 

JB 

Bailout II: The Sequel; The Travesty
December 13th, 2008

Yesterday the U.S. Senate declined to accept a $17Billion bailout deal of the US Auto Industry. After slipping $350Billion under the table to the nation’s most powerful banks and brokerages, many wonder why this is happening. The truth has many faces.

First of all, the labor unions and the political right (republicans) have been at loggerheads for centuries. Whereas the banking and investment sectors have been in bed with the political Right forever, unions are notorious for their socialistic “spread the wealth” philosophy and rarely endorse anyone but a democrat for office. Big money Capitalists and Unions were bound to one day meet for a reckoning – and this was it.

Next, republicans are very ‘lame’ right now with 30% of Senate seats reverting to democrats in January 2009, and this was their last chance to get even with the people who voted them out of office. Many will take exception to this assertion, but I don’t care, it’s the truth. The people that will loose their jobs did not vote republican. Tuff.

The auto makers and the government (that’s all government, democrats, republicans, congress, administration, all of them) were directly responsible for the mortgage/financial crisis (see http://aberantnews.org/?p=51). Thus, to prevent a backlash of indictment from Wall Street they moved quickly to prop up the companies they damn near ruined (Bailout I).

However, congress had little to do with the collapse of the auto industry. Well, that’s not entirely true. The lack of a well defined energy policy and the dismantling of the California emissions standards in the 90’s did not help the industry much. But let’s face it, if the auto industry thought they could make money with eco-friendly, low consumption vehicles, they would have pursued them. We, the people, have had as much to do with the poor choices made by US Auto makers as congress has.

No, the republicans wanted to break the unions and the only way to do that – legally – is through bankruptcy. Bankruptcy would effectively suspend any union contract and force renegotiation before the current 2011 contract term.

Now, let’s get this straight. I am not a union bigot. Nor am I a “do no wrong” union supporter. I understand that unions have been at the forefront of workers rights, a mainstay of benefits reform for all workers and an equal pay for equal work advocate. Unions have also hamstringed businesses in difficult times and made them less competitive than their non-unionized competition. However, as of late the unions and auto industry management have seen eye to eye on many issues including competitive wages and the off-loading of excessive retirement, pension and entitlement programs from the company to the union. In 2007 sweeping labor reform was undertaken by the unions that was slated to bring equity to the competitive posture of US auto makers.

Much is made of Asian auto makers (Toyota, Nissan, Honda, Kia,…) wages and benefits vs. the U.S. But little is said about European auto makers (BMW, Mercedes, Volkswagen,,,) which have wage burdens equal to or greater than the U.S.. However, I must admit, the ‘benefits’ burden placed on the U.S. auto industry by the unions is without global equal.

Let’s get this straight right now. The issue with US auto makers was not the unions, per se, or the Asian auto makers, it was the policies of the U.S. Government (or the lack thereof) and the actions of the U.S. auto maker’s management – and the U.S. citizenry – that stifled intelligent prescience.

For the U.S. Senate – of all people – to decry unions as the sole impediment to an auto industry recovery package (a.k.a. bailout) is hypocrisy at its political best.

I cannot believe that American technology, ingenuity and productivity cannot compete in the world economy. It is obvious, to me, that the political will of the lame duck Senate is malicious to the point of disabling the U.S. economy, endangering thousands of workers and business, and further reducing our economic stature in the world – for the sake of political vengeance.

I don’t like the term “bail out”. Never have. “Recovery package” or “Industrial stimulus” sounds much better. In any event, I would want very smart people – that understand the demands of energy, environment and economics – to formulate a recovery scenario that all three auto makers can adopt and American knowhow can make successful. The last people we need in this mess right now are a bunch of vindictive right wing senators.

Can we PLEASE think of someone besides ourselves just ONCE in this economic mess and think of the thousands of workers, small business suppliers and symbiotic businesses that will fail is we cannot compete in the world auto industry?

Mr. Obama, can you please see that this type of politics is lost forever in history? Mr. Bush, is your legacy to be this type of trite and partisan government?

A very smart mentor once said that “There is no such thing as a useless action. At the very least it can be used as a bad example”. Today’s Republican Right has at least this one use left.

JB